from the because,-these-days,-NOT-filing-is-never-an-option dept

Is anyone else out there excited to hear about athletes trademarking nicknames? Anyone? Or is it just another one of those things that seems to go hand-in-hand with buying defensive patents by the bucket-load and fending off onerous members of artists' estates? These IP land grabs seem to be a sign of the times, a brave new world of preemptive protectionism that leads people to believe that they have to quickly lock down everything pertaining to them, even if it's a spur of the moment nickname handed out by an enthusiastic sportscaster.

USA Gymnastics is preparing a trademark filing for the term “Fierce Five,” which was attached to the gold medal-winning women’s gymnastics team at the London Olympics, spokeswoman Luan Peszek said in an e-mail.

Peszek has said the team, including Gabby Douglas, the first black gymnast to win the all-around, preferred Fierce Five to Fab Five.

Good thing, too. The article points out that, preference or no, Fab Five is already taken, secured by Jalen Rose a mere 19 years after University of Michigan's 1991 draft class was given that nickname. I'm not sure what the opportunities are to capitalize on a catch phrase two decades down the road, but if any exist, it's probably in the "undergarments" and "pajamas" field.

The road to "Fierce Five" isn't entirely bump-free, however. Someone has beaten the Olympic medalists to the Trademark Office:

A California man, Paolo Mazza, filed for a “Fierce Five” trademark on Aug. 8, according to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office website. No attorney was listed on the filing, which provided only a post-office box in Millbrae, California, as an address. There is no telephone listing available.*

Mazza is no stranger to the trademark field, having filed one for the phrase "Lin-sational" back in February. Wisely deciding to avoid the rush on the more popular phrase "Lin-sanity," Mazza instead attempted to nail down his uncontested phrase only to find it very much contested by the USPTO, which has asked him to provide proof that Jeremy Lin is totally cool with this (orig. wording slightly paraphrased). No doubt Mazza will find himself 0-for-2 in the near future, as no one is allowed to fuck with any Olympics-related IP as it's likely the USPTO will view this new attempt as just another trademark squat, something that is becoming somewhat of a "trademark" for Paola Mazza.

So, it's a little bit of everything that's ridiculous about IP "ownership." Sportscasters use the term "Fab Five" to refer to a gymnastics team, which it can freely do as long as it doesn't slap the phrase on some pajamas, thus violating Jalen Rose's 20-years-from-the-point-of-impact trademark, which has recently been extended. The gymnastics team grants itself its own nickname, the "Fierce Five," and rushes to the USPTO to find itself second in line behind another person who thought he might capitalize on something somehow by swiftly locking the phrase down. (The whole "choose your own nickname" part of this seems a bit disingenuous. I mean, I'd like to be known as "The Impossibly Photogenic Writer" but it's more likely I'll be known as "Pirate Mike's B-Lister," among other things. Just like you don't get to choose your family members or parole officers, you just don't get to choose your own nickname.)

If the granting of trademark protection is supposed to protect consumers from bad actors and allow enforcement by the rights holders to prevent dilution, how does jumping all over a catch-phrase do any of the above? Are consumers really going to be "damaged" if they purchase a counterfeit "Furious Five" unitard? Are we really in need of a bunch of catch-phrases with a (TM) attached in order to dispel the confused haze that surely must surround us at all times? Would it be a lost opportunity if a mildly viral quote went unregistered?

I would think that a key move towards cutting down abuse of this system (trademark trolling/trademark bullying) would be to trim down on the number of, for lack of a better term, "frivolous" filings. I realize the USPTO isn't in any position to try to gauge the level of post-championship, post-interview, post-viral quote atmosphere in which the application was filed (especially months down the road when it gets reviewed), but as it stands now, the system does absolutely nothing to discourage these sorts of actions -- either the quick-fire trademark squatting or the equally-fast attempts to monetize fleeting moments.

Fierce

So to trademark this 'nickname' and keep the trademark from lapsing the mark needs to be used in commerce at all times.

Would this then make the 'five' be professional players and not amateurs, under Olympic rules, since they are receiving commercial gain (not sponsorships which is ok since it is more a gift and not 'commercial') therefore removing ad making moot any future Olympic or other amateur sporting meets?

Re:

Interesting point but it is likely to be argued that the trademark allows amateurs to protect their future professional use of the trademark even if they are not currently using it in commerce. The argument as I see it would be that it would protect from confusion that the product being offered by a third party has been authorized by the amateur when it has not been. As for the aspect of them being professionals, unless we are talking about them being able to continue to compete in collegiate competitions and other amateur only events, that went away in the early 90's.

Re: Re:

a-ma-teurs ? ? ?
what is that ? is that an archaic term or sumpin'?
here's a factoid that i bet bob costas didn't throw out in his interminable, boring, olympic-sized trivia fest:
did you know that the USOC pays US olympic medal winners ? ? ? (some other countries do too...)
i didn't, until i just ran across an article talking about it a month or so ago...
since 1984 they have paid out for medals, these days the rate is:
25 000 for a gold
15 000 for a silver
10 000 for a bronze...
funny, NO ONE i talked to who follows the oilympics knew of that minor factoid...
huh, wonder why...
you'd think in cha-ching-obsessed 'murika that would be a little more publicized...
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof

Misunderstanding

"trademark protection is supposed to protect consumers from bad actors and allow enforcement by the rights holders to prevent dilution"

There is where the misunderstanding starts and finishes. You see a Trademark is there is order for me to MAKE MONEY and to stop others from stealing MY MONEY. It therefore follows that anything that could possibly be used by me, be snapped up and so I can prevent anyone else jumping in first, or at all.

USA retards rejoice

(The whole "choose your own nickname" part of this seems a bit disingenuous. I mean, I'd like to be known as "The Impossibly Photogenic Writer" but it's more likely I'll be known as "Pirate Mike's B-Lister," among other things.